mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Aliquot Sequences

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2011-11-19, 10:39   #12
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

22E416 Posts
Default

How about yoyo's elves? How many digits are their cutoff now? Last time when we heard from him, they were working around 100-105 digits, maybe they advanced meantime? I know he is not checking reservations. I have no problem with my downdrivers, but I am in the 130's. When I was working lower (100-110) it also happens sometime that one-two terms got factored faster then I could split them. The best idea would be if the DB itself does not offer for factoring terms of reserved aliquots, but this is not easy to implement, I presume.

Edit:
Quote:
Originally Posted by unconnected View Post
Someone actively works on 933436 in the FactorDB
by the way, I am "actively" working on few higher sequences from Jean-Luc, and also I got interested in some sequences starting with squares, and I am quite advanced, so maybe we could check for merges? (For example sequences starting with 123456789^2, 123456789101112131415^2, etc, some others are not so easy to remember but I will check), maybe I involuntarly stepped on somebody's else tail?

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2011-11-19 at 10:57
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-11-19, 13:21   #13
Mini-Geek
Account Deleted
 
Mini-Geek's Avatar
 
"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA

102538 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
How about yoyo's elves? How many digits are their cutoff now? Last time when we heard from him, they were working around 100-105 digits, maybe they advanced meantime? I know he is not checking reservations. I have no problem with my downdrivers, but I am in the 130's. When I was working lower (100-110) it also happens sometime that one-two terms got factored faster then I could split them. The best idea would be if the DB itself does not offer for factoring terms of reserved aliquots, but this is not easy to implement, I presume.
Hm. I'm not sure if I'm referring to the same effort as yoyo's, but bchaffin's workers check the main reservation thread and do not work on reserved sequences.
For future reference, the chance of automated workers advancing a reserved sequence can be eliminated if you don't update the status in the FactorDB when it's below a ~C105 (unless you're stopping, of course).

Last fiddled with by Mini-Geek on 2011-11-19 at 13:23
Mini-Geek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-11-19, 15:28   #14
schickel
 
schickel's Avatar
 
"Frank <^>"
Dec 2004
CDP Janesville

2×1,049 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
How about yoyo's elves? How many digits are their cutoff now? Last time when we heard from him, they were working around 100-105 digits, maybe they advanced meantime? I know he is not checking reservations.
I would have to check the FactorDB thread, but his project has been shut down for a while now.
Quote:
I have no problem with my downdrivers, but I am in the 130's. When I was working lower (100-110) it also happens sometime that one-two terms got factored faster then I could split them. The best idea would be if the DB itself does not offer for factoring terms of reserved aliquots, but this is not easy to implement, I presume.
Since it's a Factoring database, rather than an Aliquot Sequence database, that would be rather difficult to implement....
schickel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-11-19, 16:13   #15
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

D7D16 Posts
Default

For the most part, I have been using Mini-Geek's suggestion of not updating smaller lines. I usually wait until aliqueit has chosen ggnfs on cofactor>105 to do any updates. However, I recently updated the db with a cofactor=86, after a downdriver run that was travelling back up and it was not disturbed.
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-11-19, 16:43   #16
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

22·7·11·29 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schickel View Post
I would have to check the FactorDB thread, but his project has been shut down for a while now.
Sorry, didn't know that. I am still using his script occasionally but my range is between 70-80 digits (when they got too numerous in the DB and I have nothing to do).
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-11-19, 23:03   #17
Andi47
 
Andi47's Avatar
 
Oct 2004
Austria

1001101001112 Posts
Default

Hmmm... Who ever stepped on my toes, he was quite a bit faster than my C2D (Running both threads on this sequence), so he/she must have used quite some computing power (I guess at least two threads of an i7 or an equally fast computer, hence not just passing by...). I suspect that it was not (only) the DB workers, as they would not concentrate on the relatively small factors of a single sequence only: For the DB workers the (small) composite of an aliquot sequence would just be one among thousands of other composites...

Last fiddled with by Andi47 on 2011-11-19 at 23:04
Andi47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-11-20, 06:22   #18
Mini-Geek
Account Deleted
 
Mini-Geek's Avatar
 
"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA

17×251 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andi47 View Post
For the DB workers the (small) composite of an aliquot sequence would just be one among thousands of other composites...
Not as much as you might imagine. Take a look at this list of composite size distribution in the DB: http://factordb.com/stat_1.php As you can see, there are only a (relatively speaking) handful of composites below 105 digits (e.g. right now, under 3000 <=C95, and 9861 at C105). There must be quite a bit of firepower to have brought the leading edge up so far. If an aliquot sequence were lowered to 95 digits, and there wasn't anything preventing running the sequnce, I think it would be worked pretty quickly, quite possibly faster than one C2D could.

Last fiddled with by Mini-Geek on 2011-11-20 at 06:23
Mini-Geek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-24, 12:40   #19
Jatheski
 
Jatheski's Avatar
 
Apr 2012
993438: i1090

9216 Posts
Unhappy

I reserved the sequence 891702 and got a downdriver two days ago. When I updated the sequence this morning, I realised someone already did the work.

I'm a little bit annoyed because it's not the first time !

Last fiddled with by Jatheski on 2013-03-24 at 12:41
Jatheski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-25, 13:51   #20
Greebley
 
Greebley's Avatar
 
May 2009
Dedham Massachusetts USA

34B16 Posts
Default

I think the solution is to give credit for finding a termination to whoever has it reserved since they were going to find it anyway. That way there is no benefit to running someone else's sequence ahead.

Its still a bit annoying to find you are working on factors already known, but I feel you can consider it as work to your benefit. It is still worth mentioning on the forum as it may be an honest error. Also check the reservation thread just in case your reservation isn't there.
Greebley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-25, 14:38   #21
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

26×113 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fivemack View Post
Is bcheffin's tool running on all sequences including ones that have been reserved for other projects?

I was a little surprised this morning to find that sequence 515028 had been taken a hundred iterations further than I'd had it ... I put my factors into the database and it was left there as a down-driver.

For me, at least part of the goal of the enormous attack on below-400 sequences was the chance to get some terminations; if my sequences are going to be run on by someone else as soon as I put them in the database, this goal goes away.
Your driver went down on you???

I hope she was good looking
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-29, 08:29   #22
Jatheski
 
Jatheski's Avatar
 
Apr 2012
993438: i1090

100100102 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jatheski View Post
I reserved the sequence 891702 and got a downdriver two days ago. When I updated the sequence this morning, I realised someone already did the work.

I'm a little bit annoyed because it's not the first time !

I moved on another sequence and found a downdriver . I didn't put my results on the FactorDB this time.
Anonymous is still working on the sequence 891702 and he/she found a downdriver.
Jatheski is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Buzzard stole my cat! jasong jasong 4 2012-06-25 17:16

All times are UTC. The time now is 11:38.

Sun Nov 29 11:38:01 UTC 2020 up 80 days, 8:48, 3 users, load averages: 0.61, 0.91, 1.06

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.